Ref: A00-300995 Case No. 871626 Macpherson II
Volume IX, Pages 54-61, Monday 26th June, 1989
(In the presence of the jury)
CHERYL MARY ASHWORTH: Sworn
Examined by Mr. Beckman
Q. It is Dr. Ashworth? A. It is.
Q. Your full name please? A. Dr. Cheryl Mary Ashworth.
Q. Can you tell us your personal address? A. It is 15 North
View Road, Brixham, Devon.
Q. What is your professional job? A. I am a clinical
psychologist.
Q. Your qualifications? A. I have a Master's degree in
Psychology, I have a Doctorate of - PhD - Doctorate of
Philosophy and I have a Diploma in Clinical Psychology.
Q. If I can ask it this way, how many years of experience would
you have? A. I qualified in - when did I qualify? - 1977.
Q. Your present position is where? A. It is with the Torbay
Health Authority. I am senior clinical psychologist down
there.
Q. In 1981 - I do not think you actually remember him now but -
do you actually remember him? A. I do recognise the face,
yes.
Q. In 1961 (sic) you had occasion to see Mr. Panos Koupparis?
A. I did.
Q. He was referred to you by Dr. Beard who has just given
evidence? A. Yes.
Q. Can you please tell us - by all means look at any of the
notes you like for the purpose. Can you tell us the terms of
reference as a result of which he was referred to you?
A. Do you mean why he was referred?
Q. Yes, that is less pompous: why was he referred? A. I don't
have the original referral letter so I cannot say exactly
why he was referred, but from reading my report, the things
that I have managed to get hold of at the hospital, he was
referred primarily for assessment of personality and I think,
though I am not at all sure about this, he may have been
referred also for my consideration as to whether I could
offer him any useful treatment.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: I am sorry, I missed that. Your
consideration of ---? A. As to whether I could offer him
any useful treatment.
Q. It is interesting to see why patients think they were
referred. He said he was sent to a psychologist to check for
stress; would that fit in? A. Yes, that would fit in.
MR. BECKMAN: How did he present himself to you? What was your
assessment of him? A. Well, I don't remember it all so I
have to do this from what I wrote. Do you want me to
summarise what I wrote?
Q. Put it whichever way you think best in order the jury get the
full picture. A. Well, myu[sic] conclusions were that basically
I couldn't find anything exceptional or remarkable about
Mr. Koupparis. The impression I gained was that he was a
very successful - well, "successful" maybe will do -
businessman and that the personality result - personality
questionnaire results which I used to - I suppose I used
them - to clarify and confirm what I feel my impressions,
they indicated that he didn't show any signs or symptoms of
neurotism or anxiety, no obvious ones, and that he was a high
achiever, very interested in his job, a perservering sort of
fellow, and also perhaps most important here, he didn't show
any aggression towards others but wanted to be a sociable
sort of person, a warm sociable character.
I think probably my hunch was underlying all this he was
under some pressure at work, which perhaps he was not
recognising, which may be accounting for these symptoms he
was describing, but I didn't find any evidence for that at
the time. So although I offered him relaxation and stress
management type of things, I probably did that hesitantly and
he was going to think about it and decide whether or not to
take it up. I think that will do for the minute.
Q. Can this be right or wrong: in a nutshell you found nothing
wrong with his mental state? A. Nothing.
Q. Just to see how you came to that conclusion, first of all I
think you indicated you made your personal assessment?
A. Yes.
Q. That is, in other words, like a psychiatrist except as a
psychologist? A. Yes.
Q. What you then did was apply various tests, objective tests
that go away from him personally as an individual to
objective tests? Those results over years of experience are
meant to assist in your diagnosis? A. Yes.
Q. You gave him at least - how many tests did you give him?
A. Three.
Q. Which ones are those? A. Crown (inaudible) personality
questionnaire and Edwards Personal Preference Schedule.
Q. Are these tests all totally different in their approach in
order to see whether you arrive at the same conclusion?
A. Yes, they all use different methods.
Q. Did any of the tests indicate that there was any mental
problem at all? A. No.
Q. Did they confirm your personal assessment? A. Yes.
Q. As far as you know, did that coincide with the views
expressed by Dr. Beard? A. As far as I know, I cannot be
sure of that.
MR. BECKMAN: There is a document I would like you to read but I
will not waste time now about it. Perhaps we will leave
cross-examination for a moment, but I would like you to read
a document in any event. I will not do anything about it
now.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: Which document is this?
MR. BECKMAN: The demand document.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: This is all you have to ask about the
examination?
MR. BECKMAN: Based on what I have now certainly, but the road
having been opened, I may wish to explore it further.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: We will see. Mr. Temple, before you
ask any questions, this lady, who is highly qualified in her
field, saw this man six years before the crime is said to be
committed. I am not at all sure it is relevant that she
should look at the demand document and make comments on it.
That is, as I indicated when the other doctors were giving
evidence, a matter for the jury with the assistance of the
doctors who saw him at the time. The examination of
Dr. Beard and of this lady is also relevant in that
Mr. Beckman can say he was not hypomanic, or was not
diagnosed, in 1981. I am very much exercised that the jury's
job should not be taken away from them by experts who saw him
six years before. I think it might be confusing.
MR. TEMPLE: Yes, my Lord. May I make my position clear; I do
not formally oppose it, I merely perhaps make the comment in
advance as it were, that the value and weight of any such
evidence is virtually negligible.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: Mr. Beckman, this lady must have been
asked to give a proof. She has not been asked about it and
she has not seen the documents. It seems to me if you do not
cross-examine about it the matter has to stop there.
MR. TEMPLE: My Lord, I have no intention of cross-examining this
lady on these matters.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: Dr. Beard has seen it and I did not,
unfortunately, stop him at the time. Mr. Beckman can ask
about that but not of this witness.
MR. BECKMAN: Perhaps your Lordship would observe (sic) the
matter as I am sure your Lordship would wish to hear me
first. If I might let the witness see it and then I can ask
about it to see if it has any value. If I may reserve the
position in any event ---
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: My feeling is if that was wanted or
required or that desirable, then they should have seen it by
now because we know this case lasted 17 days the last time
and we have had all this time on this occasion.
MR. BECKMAN: I am aware of that. The reason - as I said
earlier, I called this witness solely as to fact. My learned
friend thought fit to open up the matter as to these
witnesses' expertise and if he secures a point - if I may put
it in the nicest way - they are relevant to the jury. If on
the other hand it goes the other way, equally it is relevant.
That is, once the floodgates are open, as your Lordship
pointed out when I asked one question of my own some days
ago in respect of another matter - having done that the
floodgates could be opened subject to your Lordship's ---
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: Very well, we will see what the cross-
examination is.
CROSS-EXAMINED BY MR. TEMPLE
Q. Doctor, I have very few questions for you. You remember in
your notes he told you he was a very successful businessman
and a high achiever. Did he tell you anything about his
education? A. Well, I don't know, I haven't got anything.
Probably he did because I do usually check up on people's
education, but I haven't written anything in my report about
that and I cannot remember.
Q. In other words, he did not give you a list as to his
qualifications, anything like that? A. He might have done
but I don't know.
Q. Really it comes to exactly the same question: you have him
as a very successful businessman; did he tell you what he was
doing? A. Again I don't know, sorry.
MR. BECKMAN: My Lord, the witness's evidence was not that she
was told; she got the impression that - my Lord, what I am
going to do ---
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: "My impression was of a very successful
businessman."
MR. BECKMAN: I am very much obliged. What I am going to do is
I would ask the witness to look at the documents. If they
can be of assistance I will make an application to your
Lordship as your Lordship will hear anything further about
it. It is only if I feel she can assist the Court, bearing
in mind the way matters have gone.
MR JUSTICE MACPHERSON: I think it is for me to grasp the nettle.
I will not allow any evidence from this witness about the
document.
MR. BECKMAN: Could I ask your Lordship to let her read it?
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: She can of course read it but it may be
fruitless.
MR. BECKMAN: It may be I shall have to grasp the nettle in due
course.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: Ladies and gentlemen, the reason I have
done that - I do not want to hide anything from you, but you
are deciding the case and not a series of very expert
witnesses who did not see him at the time and have not seen
him give evidence. That is why I am likely to exclude any
comment on the document from this highly experienced
psychologist. She can see it and we will see what will
happen. Do you want an adjournment now until the doctor is
ready?
MR. BECKMAN: I do not know how his time is going.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: He is still reading it so I will rise
until 3.30. I believe a good deal of discretion in the
questions asked of him would be wise and of more assistance
to the jury than a lot of documents.
(The trial was adjourned for a short time)
MR. BECKMAN: I do not know which doctor your Lordship wants but
I have not re-examined either doctor yet.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: There is not much to ask the second one.
MR. BECKMAN: There is one point I intend to ask. She is reading
the report at the moment.
MR. JUSTICE MACPHERSON: Then we will have Dr. Beard.
Index | Previous | Next